First off, I apologize for bringing a personal disagreement public. I felt this matter should have been discussed in private.
This is where I feel 'don't judge a book by it's cover' is timely. Thank you for reading my response and again my apologies to the rest of the forum the derailment of this thread.
Actually, harping on the New York Times doesn't mean the Post doesn't have sensationalist headlines or a right wing view to their editorials and content matter, the same as the Times uses it's place in the media to epouse left wing views. I feel both are wrong to do so and often times neglect those of us in the middle. However, it's a free press and they print what they want to. That being said, I feel the agenda of the Post is less hidden than that of the Times. I did bring it up because I see that people only see one point of view and rarely fault the other to protect their self identity. That is which group they see themselves belonging to. I hope you understand my intentions were to show not everything is so onesided, and not one side is always right.
Yes, I believe this to be the case. We agree to disagree. It's good that we can discuss it openly though. Say hello to your Jewish friends for me. Thank you.
What is clear is that, yes there is a clash of cultures. Eventually, I see more homgenizing of cultures not less. This has been true for most of the last couple of centuries. I don't find it a trend but a natural course that will be self fulfilling. I do not see this a conservative view but a pragmatic view to coexisting.
I consider McCain and more so Giuliani to be moderate Republicans with Giuliani having a more open views of issues that appeal to both ends of the spectrum. I do not consider them conservative at all. As for Hillary, I believe she got a free ticket on name recognition considering the lack of experience and success she has had politically, while McCain and Giuliani have prove their mettle with results based governance. If you see their support of W as jockeying for presidential contendership, then yes, I would agree with you there.
It was obvious at the end of the evening that Bush was going to win despite protestations. If it had been Bush/Gore lack of disparity I wouldn't have made that remark obviously.
We often take what we have for granted, but if you look at the big picture, it's a messed up place to live. Now if only the Mullahs would remove themselves and let Iran be a democracy like the citizens want it to be. I find the natural progression of people seeking more freedom to be denied by their leaders both political and religious in the mid east. Although you can see that Sistani is more openminded to democratic rule in Iraq. That's my opinion.
I do not believe that just because one believes in the death penalty means they are conservative. It's a personal choice like Abortion which I strongly support. It's a personal opinion not a political one.
I do believe many Americans overwhelmingly support stem cell research as I do. It's more the fault of Bush denying us methods and means to progress medical care in this area due to his moral beliefs. This is obviously wrong as it imposes his personal beliefs over that of science. The religious right should not obstruct the progression of science or the study that is Evolution.
I don't it's possible for me to weael out of being labeled what you want to label me. I just see this strong need for you to stamp your approval of whether I fit your view of what a conservative is. I do feel I'm much more the moderate and an outsider looking in. Maybe this is why I see things differently from you, but it's a good thing as we both should be able to express our thoughts in opinions openly on this forum without being hounded to no end for our beliefs because they may not be popular.
This is where I feel 'don't judge a book by it's cover' is timely. Thank you for reading my response and again my apologies to the rest of the forum the derailment of this thread.